Dual Citizenship Ends Refugee Claim: Court Upholds Denial for Ukrainian-Argentinian National
- Citation
- 2025 FC 1508
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-19394-24
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Anchykova v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 1508
The applicant, a dual citizen of Ukraine and Argentina, fled the war in Ukraine and sought refugee protection in Canada. The Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) denied her claim, finding she had a safe country of return in Argentina, as her fears about returning there were not objectively founded.
Court Ruling
The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review, finding the RAD's decision was reasonable. The Court agreed that the applicant's subjective fears about returning to Argentina did not meet the legal threshold for persecution and were not supported by objective evidence.
Key Quote from the Court
I accept that the [Appellant] is genuinely concerned about returning to Argentina after many years outside the country, with little or no family or friends to support her, knowing that incidents of crime occur and because she is of Slavic origin. However, her subjective fears and beliefs are not sufficiently substantiated by the objective evidence, nor do they rise to the level of persecution.
Expert Takeaways
-
Dual Citizenship Creates a High Bar for Refugee Claims Refugee claimants with citizenship in more than one country must demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution in all countries of citizenship. Access to a safe country, like Argentina in this case, will almost always lead to the denial of a claim.
-
Subjective Fear is Not Enough While decision-makers may accept that a claimant's fears are genuine, these fears must be supported by objective, credible evidence of country conditions. Personal anxieties, without objective proof of risk, do not rise to the level of persecution.
-
Context Matters in Country Reports When relying on reports like the National Documentation Package (NDP), the evidence must be relevant to the claimant's specific situation. Here, evidence of risks to 'migrant women' or ethnic discrimination against other groups was found not to apply to the applicant, a citizen of Slavic origin.
-
Understand the Definition of Persecution Not all hardships or challenges faced upon return to a country constitute persecution under refugee law. The risk must be serious and systemic. Difficulties in reintegrating, such as language fluency or lack of family, are generally not considered persecution.
There is a deadline on this
That is the window to file an Application for Leave and for Judicial Review at the Federal Court, counted from the day you were notified of the decision. An extension can be requested, but it is granted at the Court's discretion - it is not automatic.
Check my deadlineDoes this ruling apply to your situation?
Tick whatever is true for you. Nothing is sent anywhere - this stays in your browser.
That combination is worth a proper look. It does not mean you have a case - only a lawyer reading your actual documents can say that - but it does mean the question is worth asking before your filing window closes.
Disclaimer
The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration law is complex and subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please schedule a consultation with a qualified legal professional.
Refused for misrepresentation or credibility?
These findings can be challenged at the Federal Court. Speak with an immigration litigator today.
No obligation - we review your documents and tell you if a Federal Court application is realistic.
Questions people ask after reading a case like this
Does this mean my own case will succeed?
No. Every application is decided on its own record. A reported decision shows how the Federal Court has reasoned about a particular kind of error - it does not predict the result of a different file. What it can tell you is whether the problem in your refusal is the kind of problem the Court has been willing to intervene on.
How long do I have to challenge a refusal?
Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act you generally have 15 days to file an Application for Leave and for Judicial Review if the decision was made inside Canada, and 60 days if it was made outside Canada, counted from when you were notified. The Court can extend that period, but an extension is discretionary - it is not automatic.
What actually happens at the Federal Court?
Judicial review has two stages. You file the application and a written record, and a judge decides on paper whether to grant leave - permission for the case to proceed. If leave is granted, there is a hearing. The Court does not re-decide your immigration application; it decides whether the officer's decision was reasonable and procedurally fair. If you succeed, the file is normally sent back to be decided again by a different officer.
Do I have to be in Canada to bring an application?
No. Applicants outside Canada regularly bring judicial review applications, which is why the longer 60-day deadline exists for decisions made abroad. Applicants are not normally required to attend in person.
What happens in the free 15-minute review?
You explain what was refused or delayed and when you were notified. We tell you whether your filing window is still open, which issues in the decision look arguable, and what the realistic options are - including reapplying instead of litigating, where that is the better route. There is no obligation to retain us afterwards.
More Refugee Claim / Asylum rulings
Federal Court Slams Refugee Board's 'Unreasonable' Credibility Findings
Federal Court: IRCC's Delays Cannot Justify Further Delays in Refugee PR Case
Federal Court: Failure to Prove Identity is Fatal to a Refugee Claim
Federal Court: Inconsistent Testimony Fatal to Refugee Credibility
Written by
Ali Dadkhah
Ali Dadkhah is a litigator whose practice is dedicated to challenging government decisions at the Federal Court of Canada. He specializes in judicial review, providing a crucial avenue for recourse for individuals and businesses who have faced unfair or unreasonable administrative outcomes. Bilingual legal support in English and Persian (Farsi)